|
I haven't heard much about this, but I'm interested to try it.
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
I know about the backlash against story games, what I would want to try to do is divorce the game somewhat from the community, as it is filled with some very vocal minority venom. The key would be to try and market in a way where there is less "that games not a real rpg, play this instead." and more of a "hey that's a lot like an rpg, maybe you would like this.". Controlling tone is paramount, and probably the biggest hurdle. Maybe call them "Adventure Games", that always sounded more fun and less technical than Role Playing Games anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
This whole 'sell an RPG in a box to non-RPG people' thing isn't new, of course. My parents have an old Alfred Hitchcock's How To Host A Murder box in their basement, possibly never used. (Neither can remember.) How to Host a Murder was basically a packaged murder mystery LARP thing from the 80s, apparently they're still in business. They were never marketed towards RPG players.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Unless it got a hell of a lot better, when we tried it it wasn't very good. Which really sucks, it's a neat idea in theory. e: referring to Storium
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:I haven't heard much about this, but I'm interested to try it. I haven't gotten to play it, just the first thing that came to mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
As much as I hate to say it, the best prepared company to pull off a mass rpg market already owns its biggest game,, that of course being D&D. Given wildest dream level control, I would suggest Hasbro move the game out of its WOTC subsidiary and sell it directly as a Hasbro product, in the kind of stores Hasbro sells in, big box stores. It would obviously require a more simple version of the game, a "Basic" if you will, with an "Advanced" option for those gamers who want complexity and big books to lug around. I would create a network cartoon, and flood the air with commercials for the product, you know, hook em while they're young. Honestly TSR, for all its issues, had it right for a little while there, what with getting the basic set into Toys R Us and the like. remusclaw fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
I had a blast playing Critical: Go Westerly! It was simple, fast and accessible, and I'm thinking of doing a serious-themed game using that system. It's a game I would run for people new to roleplaying. People have cited games like Fiasco for ages as ways to push RPGs into the mainstream. The thing people never get a handle on is that the system doesn't attract. The story world does. Vampire attracted thousands of gamers by mixing the vampire fiction zeitgeist with a powerful original mythology and roles that were situated in a world as well as being story conceits. Licensed RPGs almost never succeed this way (even though you think they might) because they aren't tailored for games. WEG Star Wars was a notable exception because WEG essentially designed the Expanded Universe solo for the first 4 years. Setting/story world design for RPGs is in a pretty weak state right now for a number of reasons. Part of it is an overly functional approach, designing setting elements with a total focus on their game effects in a conscious way, which tends to leave lifeless, contrived looking results. Part of it is that you have a market leader with a troubled relationship with story. WotC can't really seem to figure out how to manage its worlds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:As much as I hate to say it, the best prepared company to pull off a mass rpg market already owns its biggest game,, that of course being D&D. Given wildest dream level control, I would suggest Hasbro move the game out of its WOTC subsidiary and sell it directly as a Hasbro product, in the kind of stores Hasbro sells in, big box stores. It would obviously require a more simple version of the game, a "Basic" if you will, with an "Advanced" option for those gamers who want complexity and big books to lug around. I would create a network cartoon, and flood the air with commercials for the product, you know, hook em while they're young. To credit TSR, the company actually hired professionals in child development and psychology to make D&D more accessible. The Holmes version of D&D was the first step on the road to the red box. I don't know what WotC has done by comparison, but I don't think any professionals consulted would say "release three enormous books months apart and a box set that is redundant once you buy the books."
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
call them 'Collaborative Adventure Games.' The idea of a 'play out of the box' core game where you can add additional modules in blister-packs would be an interesting thing to see. What just plain needs to happen for WotC to stay afloat is stop trying to rewrite D&D. Make a new drat game and call it something else. The Grognards can keep playing D&D, and they can even devote a team to making new rules to keep them buying. Then a new team of RP enthusiasts can write the content for new-age players, keep it simple and sweet. I just don't understand why WotC thinks they can only have ONE game. I, personally, can't play modern editions of D&D without thinking that my childhood memories are being pissed on. (With possible exception of 4E, because that's not really an RPG, but a Tactical Fantasy Simulator.) I tried to play the 5E playtests several times and vomited on my keyboard each time I read the rules.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
MalcolmSheppard posted:To credit TSR, the company actually hired professionals in child development and psychology to make D&D more accessible. The Holmes version of D&D was the first step on the road to the red box. I don't know what WotC has done by comparison, but I don't think any professionals consulted would say "release three enormous books months apart and a box set that is redundant once you buy the books." It continues to amaze me that we won't be seeing the DMG for a few more months. Someone in WotC's D&D branch hosed up hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
I think a problem today, which didn't exist in the same way when Vampire came out is the lack of a shared cultural experience. Before the widespread adoption of the internet and everyone getting cable, there was a norm that could easily identified, you could generally accept that everyone knew what you were talking about when you mentioned a Network TV show, or a best selling novel. Now, with the internet, there is pinpoint catering going on for everyone's particular fetish, and this has split what used to be something of a super-culture into numerous subcultures, and the previous subcultures into stratified mini-cultures. You cant sell general products to everyone anymore, they already can cover their bases with a more specific product.
remusclaw fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:I know about the backlash against story games, what I would want to try to do is divorce the game somewhat from the community, as it is filled with some very vocal minority venom. The key would be to try and market in a way where there is less "that games not a real rpg, play this instead." and more of a "hey that's a lot like an rpg, maybe you would like this.". Controlling tone is paramount, and probably the biggest hurdle. Maybe call them "Adventure Games", that always sounded more fun and less technical than Role Playing Games anyway. TSR and WotC both had in house styles that forbade the use of the term role playing game (in whatever form) in favour of "adventure game" for ages. The fact that 5e bills itself as an RPG may speak to its desire to reclaim errant fans, or it might just be because RPGs are better known through computer games and online freestyle play.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:I think a problem today, which didn't exist in the same way when Vampire came out is the lack of a shared cultural experience. Before the widespread adoption of the internet and everyone getting cable, there was a norm that could easily identified, you could generally accept that everyone knew what you were talking about when you mentioned a Network TV show, or a best selling novel. Now, with the internet, there is pinpoint catering going on for everyone's particular fetish, and this has split what used to be something of a super-culture into numerous subcultures, and the previous subcultures into stratified mini-cultures. You cant sell general products to everyone anymore, they already can cover their bases with a more specific product. I'm not sure this is true. I mean we've been through Harry Potter, Marvel, and a whole slew of console releases. There's a bit of doldrums right now (like, who gives a poo poo about being in Destiny's world?) but still room. The trouble is, as I've said, that Vampire didn't just emulate its inspirations. It brought them together under one mythology, and gave its class-analogue a strong social role. This kind of tuning is critical. The factions used in 5e play are interesting for pointing in this direction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
poo poo, maybe create a really ridiculously complicated gaming system like a GURPS, HERO, or Phoenix Command, that handles everything with the best math game designers can design, and tie it directly to a computer program that handles all those fiddly bits and rules so the GM or players don't have to. Just tell the program what you want to do, roll the dice, and input the number, get the result. I used to be real into simualationist style games, and GURPS would have blown my mind when I was a kid, trying to fit the round peg of D&D into that square hole, and a program that did all the hard work for a game like that would rock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Teonis posted:What just plain needs to happen for WotC to stay afloat is stop trying to rewrite D&D. Make a new drat game and call it something else. The Grognards can keep playing D&D, and they can even devote a team to making new rules to keep them buying. Then a new team of RP enthusiasts can write the content for new-age players, keep it simple and sweet. Because WotC, as a company, mainly exists to create and sell Magic: the Gathering. D&D is a sideline enterprise at best. D&D makes a fraction of the money that Magic does, so WotC could either: A). Focus their attention and resources on the game that makes real actual money, or B). Devote time and resources to developing another game of the sort that they already publish which doesn't deliver the same return on investment, this one without the 30+ years of built-up nerd culture cred that D&D has. WotC has published other RPGs before, Gamma World and various iterations of Star Wars among them, and none of them have ever taken the world by storm or even taken the RPG hobby by storm. So WotC has probably decided that there's no point in throwing good money after bad and if they have to publish an RPG it at least ought to be the one that has inertia behind it. Teonis posted:I, personally, can't play modern editions of D&D without thinking that my childhood memories are being pissed on. (With possible exception of 4E, because that's not really an RPG, but a Tactical Fantasy Simulator.) I tried to play the 5E playtests several times and vomited on my keyboard each time I read the rules. Ironically, people complaining about their childhood memories of D&D being pissed on and decrying 4E as "not really an RPG" is how we wound up with Next in the first place, so be careful what you wish for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
I don't think a superheavy but automated system would bring in new players but I still really want one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Yeah, that was less about my mass market ideas and more my dream game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Ironically, people complaining about their childhood memories of D&D being pissed on and decrying 4E as "not really an RPG" is how we wound up with Next in the first place, so be careful what you wish for. Don't get me wrong, I like 4E a lot. Just not for Role Playing. I think of it as a Tactical Simulator, and its a lot of fun that way too. when you use the system for what it is good at, the games are good. when you try to put bad role play mechanics with it, you get bad games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Teonis posted:Don't get me wrong, I like 4E a lot. Just not for Role Playing. I think of it as a Tactical Simulator, and its a lot of fun that way too. when you use the system for what it is good at, the games are good. when you try to put bad role play mechanics with it, you get bad games. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEStsLJZhzo
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
D&D doesn't historically have good roleplay mechanics though, so I'm not sure how that makes it different from any other edition. I'm not calling you out as an edition warrior or anything, I'm just pointing out that the narrative of "4E isn't a real RPG, it's just a boardgame/WoW/a tactical simulator/whatever" is what led the rallying cry for Next, a game that also doesn't feature good roleplaying mechanics or indeed good mechanics at all. 4E is as much a roleplaying game as any edition of D&D has ever been so if 4E is bad for roleplaying, well
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
So I'm actually making a digitally augmented tabletop RPG right now. I'd be curious to hear what people imagine when they talk about these things. I have to run right now (I wrote up a big post about this that my browser ate right before posting it), but I'd be super into asking people some question about what they'd find interesting/helpful later on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Yeah, D&D's roleplaying mechanics - reaction rolls, proficiency / skill systems, etc. - have never been terribly compelling. The main difference of 4e is a reduction in utility abilities (mostly by excising the broken spell system), but a lot of the old utility abilities never came up anyway. (Seriously, when you're traveling with four other bodies, how often is trackless step going to come up, for example?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Teonis posted:I, personally, can't play modern editions of D&D without thinking that my childhood memories are being pissed on. (With possible exception of 4E, because that's not really an RPG, but a Tactical Fantasy Simulator.) I tried to play the 5E playtests several times and vomited on my keyboard each time I read the rules. Hate to break it to you but all of D&D is a Tactical Fantasy Simulator if 4E is
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:So I'm actually making a digitally augmented tabletop RPG right now. I'd be curious to hear what people imagine when they talk about these things. I think if you go computer assisted, you can really lean on having lots of interlocking systems. Like... if you're making car wars, and adding on a Giant Machine Gun adds to your firepower, but also affects your top speed, and your acceleration, and your turning radius, and your profile when you're being shot at, and and and... This is all poo poo that's tedious as poo poo to work out by hand, but with chargen software you can make these systems as complex as you like, and then have it spit out a playsheet that condenses all that poo poo down to straightforward gameplay mechanics. You could have your character generation be Traveller as gently caress. Instead of rolling dice and picking feats off a shopping list, the software could walk you through a choose-your-own-adventure to determine your backstory, and along the way determine your stats and abilities.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
It feels strange talking to people NOT in the Dungeon World thread, I feel so secluded.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:poo poo, maybe create a really ridiculously complicated gaming system like a GURPS, HERO, or Phoenix Command, that handles everything with the best math game designers can design, and tie it directly to a computer program that handles all those fiddly bits and rules so the GM or players don't have to. Just tell the program what you want to do, roll the dice, and input the number, get the result. As it happens, Robin Laws (who I think worked on HERO) and Slabtown games tried to do exactly this on kickstarter. The idea was to have a complex base game with the possibility of varying levels of complexity. Then, down the road, more customization and settings would be added in. It didn't fund, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:So I'm actually making a digitally augmented tabletop RPG right now. I'd be curious to hear what people imagine when they talk about these things. For some strange reason, when I imagine such a program, my mind pictures the classic green text on a black screen. That is not what I want, but it is the picture in my minds eye. I want GURPS essentially, in all its modularity and complexity. I want the ability to pick and choose what options and books are in effect. I want to be able to simulate whatever kind of faux reality I can think of with a game system. A shareable digital game-space wouldn't hurt, with a choice for squares, hexes, and 3 dimensional movement for thing like flying and burrowing. Finally, I want to have to do as little math as possible, while reaping the benefits of maximum math. There should probably be a simple and advanced user interface for those who want more or less complex options. remusclaw fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Teonis posted:It feels strange talking to people NOT in the Dungeon World thread, I feel so secluded. Here, a thread for you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
Oh-ho-ho, you got me. I'm surprised out how clever you can be!
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Sionak posted:As it happens, Robin Laws (who I think worked on HERO) and Slabtown games tried to do exactly this on kickstarter. The idea was to have a complex base game with the possibility of varying levels of complexity. Then, down the road, more customization and settings would be added in. Yeah, I guess we cant make gaming too easy or approachable, or the wrong kind of people might play. Sigh. That is a bummer. Here lies Storyscape; https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/829385949/storyscape-digital-roleplaying-system remusclaw fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Does anyone remember how Fallout was originally going to be based on GURPS? Steve Jackson is probably still kicking himself for ruining that deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Teonis posted:The idea of a 'play out of the box' core game where you can add additional modules in blister-packs would be an interesting thing to see. quote:I, personally, can't play modern editions of D&D without thinking that my childhood memories are being pissed on. (With possible exception of 4E, because that's not really an RPG, but a Tactical Fantasy Simulator.) I tried to play the 5E playtests several times and vomited on my keyboard each time I read the rules. Love you to death and we're totes Dungeon World bros, but this is categorically incorrect. Like, that statement is almost point for point why5Eexists.txt
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
I recently played the fancy boxed edition of Montsegur 1244 and I realized while playing that with some slight tweaks to presentation (mostly cutting up the read aloud parts of the rulebook and turning them into double sided reference cards, maybe editing the text into something quicker to read.) you'd get a really good thematic board/card game that is also blatantly a roleplaying game. Something that appeals to the same people that like Gloom or even Dixit. It's a pretty easy game to pitch to that audience: "you tell a story based on the cards you choose and the cards you play, it's a tragedy in 5 acts about a medieval religious sect." I don't think the name of the genre matters at all so much as how accessible and interesting it is to players. You shouldn't strip the role-playing/story-telling/whatever out of these games to do this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
So, this is changing the topic, but most of my rpg group is becoming really awful with scheduling with the exception of one person. Me and him still want to play, but can't really get a game going. What are good systems as far as solo games go? Also, I guess we could try doing something online, but that's never worked out so well for us in the past.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
I kind of see two big challenges to the new-player-focused RPG concept, depending on which angle you go for: -Digitally enhanced, mechanically focused, etc. At that point, why should the player engage with this game that actively requires people be available to play, and specific people at that, when they could just play an RPG videogame like Skyrim, or an MMO? Sure, they won't get as much choice, but they'll get a fair bit(especially in the combat range, where most of the obvious choice in tabletop RPGs occurs anyways), with some slick graphics, and they can play it at 3 AM in their underpants if they so choose. -Super fiction-focused, stripping as much of the mechanical slog out as possible. Your Fiascos of the world. At that point, why should the new player engage with these, when they could instead mess with the far more popular straight-up freeform roleplaying? Sure, it doesn't even have a whiff of balance or mechanical stuff, but you can play out all the drama you want, and if you're in the right crowds, it's super easy to find a cool-sounding game to drop into. Now, I'm sure there are answers to this, a balance that makes RPGs an appealing thing in their own right. Something that'll make them more interesting to the folks who would normally lean to one of the two other 'big' options. I just don't know what those answers are, especially if we're not going for god-king "I'll just enforce a boxed set on the shelf of every toy store in America" stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:So, this is changing the topic, but most of my rpg group is becoming really awful with scheduling with the exception of one person. Me and him still want to play, but can't really get a game going. What are good systems as far as solo games go? Scarlet Heroes is an old-school retroclone specifically designed with 1 Player, 1 DM in mind. The Quick Start Rules are free.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Teonis posted:call them 'Collaborative Adventure Games.' What, like Descent, but more open and poo poo? They even have expansions that have new heroes, monsters, and quests and poo poo. It's a simple system that lets others DM for a change instead of alternating between my one buddy and myself. Sometimes we'd just draw our own maps and create our own encounters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
One of the coolest old games I have, that I haven't gotten to play yet is En Garde!, from Game Designers Workshop, made in 1975. I have seen it called an almost rpg, but just looking at it I honestly don't know how I would be able to resist getting into character as Aramis or Porthos. It simulates the life of Musketeer era swashbuckler, and almost feels like a proto Pendragon when it comes to genre emulation. It is pretty much a contemporary of OD&D and is much better organized. It is very gameist and uses strict timekeeping. It comes in at around 46 pages and seems like it would play like an rpg built entirely around traveller style character creation, with each turn taking up a month and detailing your character life, possible military service, clubs you join, court intrigues, and occasional duels. Dueling is based on picking moves and routines from a table secretly and is adjudicated when your routine is compared to your opponents. It was apparently played pretty heavily in pbm format, and one day I will play this game. remusclaw fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Yalborap posted:I kind of see two big challenges to the new-player-focused RPG concept, depending on which angle you go for: Has the internet built a thing yet where I just put myself "out there" and wait for people to join? The DM/online-TTRPG equivalent of going "looking for group!" in WoW's trade channel? I stumbled on concepts like a megadungeon or a Westmarch campaign and that seems to be really suited to a style of play where people just drop in and out without having to commit this specific set of persons to these specifically scheduled sessions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
I think roll20 has a thing for "LFG" style games and it works about as well as you would expect rolling the dice on an elfgame with random internet strangers to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 00:16
|
|